Strange tactics

[BainsBane]

Have you notice that gunners have a habit of demanding that their opponents provide certain data and show evidence that conforms with their precise specifications? If for some reason you follow their orders and do so, they reject the data because it doesn't say what they want to see. They they'll say, why don't you provide evidence of nice gun owners, or why don't you denounce gun grabbers, etc. ..

I've never seen another group sit back and demand others provide evidence and make their argument for them. Typically people provide their own evidence in an effort to counter an argument they disagree with, but not gunners. They demand you go find the evidence for them. They won't even click on a link to explore a source. They'll tell you to do it for them. What is that? Is it a deliberate pro-gun tactic? Are they self entitled and used to everything being handed to them? Or could it really be they are just that lazy? I find it strange.

Anyone have insight as to where this comes from? How do you deal with this sort of tactic?

[CTyankee]

1. I think they feel hugely "entitled." It is part of their strut.

To them, the ultra right wing Roberts court, handed down God's HOly Writ in the Heller decision. In that sense they are as bad as religious zealots. The irony of their defense of a court that has routinely stripped rights away from other people and enshrined some of the most egregious case law decisions this country has ever suffered, is lost on them. You have to wonder what they are doing here, on a liberal/progressive website. Oh, they would proclaim their fidelity to progressive principles, but I have my doubts. Some are trolls, plain and simple. The others are deluded, some living out a "movie" of their heroic lives. I truly believe they lead very Walter Mitty-like lives....

[billh58]

2. Even though many

of them shy away from the NRA label, they parrot NRA-twisted statistics endlessly. Anything that doesn't fit neatly into their NRA-approved pro-gun propaganda is ignored as being "Brady Bunch" lies and anti-gun rubbish.

Yes, I believe that it IS a deliberate pro-gun tactic, as developed and refined by the "cold dead hands" propagandists from the right-wing, Koch Brothers-funded NRA.

[flamin lib]

3. It's because gun ownership in America isn't a right,

it's one of the world's great religeons. Arguing with a born again Christian fundamentalist over biblical dogma is identical to arguing with a gun fetishist over rights and responsibilities.

[BainsBane]

4. that certainly explains their refusal to consider evidence

I've had some odd discussions where I present them with evidence and they insist it doesn't say what it clearly does in black and white. Just last night I went through a point by point take down of someone's argument about gun trafficking in Mexico, and he responded by saying "what you've written confirms what I said." Truly bizarre.
Religious devotion is the only thing that explains that kind of schism from reality.

[ceonupe]

5. By design like many controversial issues the "data"

Is hard to come by.

First the raw data on deaths and shootings is there but relating it to gun ownership legal or not is hard and expensive. With the help of modern computers its possible but the main problem is the data does not exist in a vacuum and making assumptions from it is tricky at best. An example is how overall gun crime and homicide by gun has gone down over the last 20 years.

But one thing I know is when the government gets involved in research the results can be good or bad depending on the ultimate political goals. A great example is Marijuana. Another our advancements in treating illness.

[BainsBane]

6. Oh, like cancer, cure for aids, and other diseases?

All research of consequence is federally funded. Yes, it would be far better if there were no treatments for cancer or AIDS. The country would be far better off if we'd never mapped the human genome or developed the internet. The right certainly thinks so.

Anyone who finds knowledge and research threatening has problems far more serious that can be dealt with here.

[ceonupe]

7. You read me wrong

I was saying like how the powers that be prevent research on certian topics or slant it.

For example the lack of research on MJ.

I was pointing out that when given the ability to work without political manipulation the CDC and other government research groups make huge breakthroughs and can provide better data to help lawmakers craft better policy but its a balance for example some will block and threaten to defund.

Its the same reason we don't have good studies and data on alternative education (NEA won't allow it). MJ (big alc., pharma and private prisons don't want it) Guns (big business does not want it)

[BainsBane]

8. So far better to allow the NRA to suppress knowledge

I got the point. Lackeys of the gun lobby outlawed that research, and you are defending it. That ban exists because of people like you more concerned with guns than the public interest or freedom of speech.

NEA funds Arts, not education. I'm aware of no ban on funding of alternative education. Review committees are comprised of experts in the field, not union members. That is true for every single funding agency and every single academic discipline. The problem is when congress puts up legal roadblocks because of the interference of the NRA and their followers who are determined to shred the First Amendment in pursuit of profits for the gun industry, and their lackeys who care only about guns and not knowledge, their fellow citizens, or anything but their god forsaken guns.


Moreover, I would wager there are lots of grants awarded on that subject all the time, by the DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. Here is a list of the open calls from the Office on Innovation and Improvement. http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/find/edlite-forecast.html#chart5

They sure do give a lot of grants to charter schools
http://ies.ed.gov/ncer/pubs/

If there is a law forbidding funding in alternative education, you should be able to find it. Here is an article from the American Psychological Association on the ban into federal funding on research on guns. http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2013/02/gun-violence.aspx
If it's the same as in other areas, you should be able to find a whole slew of congressional orders and laws restricting funding into whole areas of research.

[ceonupe]

10. im not defending it I actually want more data on gun crime and violent crime in genral

I oppose efforts by parties to prevent government research.

[Kingofalldems]

13. I get the strong impression you are an avid pro gun rights

poster. So why are you here?

[ceonupe]

15. Less than 2 months ago a friend of mine

Got into a fight outside a club in Atlanta.

After the fight he went to the car of friend grabbed the friends gun went back to the fight scene. Unknown to him police had arrived and say him with the gun. He was told to drop it and was shot 7 times and his friend near him was shot once in the arm.

About 3 weeks ago he died from the multiple gun shots.

The gun was legally owned by another friend with a ccw that attempted to stop the friend who just got beaten up from going back with it. He literally was grabbing him when the shots from the police rang out.

Don't assume I don't support increased training requirements to get a ccw. The dead friend did not have a ccw and was drunk and honestly was seaking revenge.

I balance this with the fact the owner of the gun got it and the ccw after being robbed and assaulted with his girlfriend.

Complicated and made worse in this case by the presence of the gun. Yes I am pro 2nd amendment but I'm not blind to the fact that often times guns make bad situations fatal.

[ceonupe]

17. Because some will question

If I'm even being real about this here is a link to the story

ajc story


And my from his Facebook page Facebook page

[BainsBane]

18. He is

[BainsBane]

9. The Republicans are trying to abolish the Political Science section

of NSF, yet they haven't succeeded. Of course, Republicans despise science and education and general, so they don't like any kind of research. Those who defend the ban on research into gun violence betray their allegiances.

[BainsBane]

11. Sure is quiet

in a certain group. Seems like they cleared out after the verdict.

[billh58]

12. They're most likely

out celebrating their hero's "victory" by walking around in public with their guns, and looking for hoodie-wearing "bad guys" to intimidate.

[Walk away]

14. I have long assumed that the Gun Lobby was just a big troll forum.

A few regular DUers post but most of the members live their DU lives in that strange little world.

[billh58]

16. It is,

and they are.